About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25
, with the deficit cut by 25% and interest rates at historic lows, does my right honorable friend not agree with me that the opposition plan b for more debt would jeopardize all those achievements? [cheers and applause] >> my honorable friend is entirely right. we are making progress. of course it is tough when there are so many economic headwinds against us, but a million more private sector jobs, a record number of businesses starting up last year, we're on the quite clear, plan b stands for bankruptcy, that's what labour would give us. >> last but not least,up -- ann pruitt. >> a universal health care is what the overwhelming majority of parish people want, something which i remain firmly committed to. however, there are claims about nurses who fail to show care and compassion to their patients. what exactly will the prime minister do about that? >> the honorable lady speaks for the whole house and the whole country in raising this issue, and i know how pain. it must have been -- painful it must have been with what he's witnessed with her or own family. i am, as she is, an enormous fan of the po
rates are about raising money, not punishing success. in terms of the deficit, we have cut the budget deficit by 25%, will be getting an update on progress from the chancellor in a minute but let me ask this. how can you deal with the borrowing program by pledging to borrow more? >> let's just be clear, mr. speaker, about his answer on 60 p. the answer, the answer to the problem, the answer to the problem of tax avoidance is to give the people doing a tax cut. give them a big giveaway. the reality, the reality is, the reality the prime minister couldn't get away from, the deficit is going up, not down, on his watch. we all remember the posters which is airbrushed, i will cut the deficit, not the nhs. the facts speak for themselves. he cut the nhs and is not cutting the deficit. >> we are increasing spending on the nhs and we are cutting the deficit. we have cut the deficit by 25%. there are a million more private sector jobs. businesses are starting at higher rate than any time in our history. this economy is on the right track. we are equipping britain for the global race and on like
of the middle class -- catch up with my slides. there we go. the deficit and debt will improve as 34%. but the one thing they are certain is that taxes will increase. and in the next four years how it affected you think the federal government will be on each of the following issues. we read a list of these issues, we rotated those. this is how it basically stacks up. ensuring long-term future of entire programs such as social security and medicare, 65%. 64% creating jobs, 64% improving public education, growing the economy, creating a business environment that allows for innovation. lowering the federal deficit actually false down to 40. not as much confidence there as a part on the other side. we been said the training faces a number of challenges including but not limited to large budget deficits, national debt, slower economic recovery, high unemployment, deep political divide on many issues. do you believe we will overcome these challenges in the foreseeable future as we've done in the past, or do you think these are unique set of challenges that are so serious that we might not
to the labour party. they want to be in government and they claim they want to cut the deficit. what would they cut? what would they cut? if they object to the local government settlement and the object to the defense settlement and the objective the nhs budget and the object to the education budget, even though nhs schools are going up, and what exactly would they do? the problem is as was evident from the shadow chancellor's response, they didn't have anything to say on these matters but if they had a credible deficit plan then we would listen to the questions they ask us about the priorities of those plans. >> john stephenson. >> this cools and colleges of 270 million are extremely welcome. schools and colleges such as those in my constituency plans on the runway ready to take off, just in a little additional financial support. will the chancellor help those colleges and schools? >> i'm very happy to look personally at the case my honorable friend makes for his local education facility. these are of course other government departments but we have provided the money for education, for ne
, and he said that it is untanble to not cut them because they are driving the budget deficit, and, you know, the whole entitlement issues, the real core of the problem, the taxing issue, yes, the pyrotechnics, and its -- there's the struggle between the republican and democratic view, but all the numbers people know that it's the entitlement issue so if there's a fix, trajectory to make it somehow stable, that would be -- that's the relation. uh-oh, you have something from the book. >> your books are all ultimately about power, how it's used, squandered, built, and so the sub text of the events that you write about is how life works, how washington works. my favorite sentence in "the price of politics" is, "when you need friends, it's too late to make them." what have you learned about washington and life from the grand bargain? what is the hundred-year lesson from how that unraveled? >> well, you mean last year? what happened last year? well, that they found a way to postpone everything, and, again, they can postpone lots of the problems, but postponement is the theme. the cliche, "ki
of the tenure period the deficit to gdp ratio would be under 1%. succumbing you would solve the deficit problem. estimate under 1%? the percentage of your debt as the deficit to the gdp. the deficit to gdp. a deficit to gdp. now, we don't want to get there that we. the same way we don't want to go over the fiscal cliff. in other words, the fiscal cliff is a big austerity. we get $7 trillion in the deficit reduction over the last ten years. but you don't do it the way we want to do it. when it comes to the baseline, we have to work together as part of an agreement to get the right baseline but that doesn't mean it is not for real world deficit reduction. it is. does it mean that it's better than the current law? maybe not. but there is an agreement that in the fiscal cliff is not the best way. >> we could add the baseline. the deficit to gdp. >> you said the deficit. >> you look at the current line baseline and get under 1% of deficit to gdp. >> seven years and 7 trillion of debt reduction. if anybody wants to read more about, please look at that space on what it takes. i thank you all for being
the kinds of revenue from the wealthiest americans to help the economy grow and achieve deficit reduction and this puts us on a path towards a better economy. >> [inaudible question] what will he do at this moment? >> i would simply redirect that question to the republican leaders, who to this day, have not put forward any proposal on how they would achieve revenues and address the issue on the top 2%. there is no other way to do it, there is no other mathematically sound way to do it. making vague promises about achieving revenue through capping deductions were closing loopholes, it simply doesn't add up to a serious proposal. we haven't heard which deductions they would cap or which loopholes they were close. what is true is that other proposals that have been put forward include attempts to raise revenue only through closing loopholes and limited deductions can only achieve this if the middle class gets stuck with the bill. or if you have a proposal that is wildly limply unfeasible because it suggests that we would wipe out charitable deductions. it is simply impossible and getting som
and screaming that can't be part of it, yet all of them privately will tell you what's driving the deficit more than any single thing of medicare and medicaid and longer-term social security, so the mere fact that we are discussing those types of things fit. in terms of the votes, look, if it's going to be a deal there has to be votes from both sides. the reality is -- and these guys, the president and the speaker dealt with one another before. they've never been able to come to a deal. they came to a huge deal during the lame-duck session in 2010 on extending the bush tax cuts. they came to another deal without shutting down the government in april of 2011 cutting discretionary spending by billions of dollars and they came to another one on the debt ceiling as well which was a 2.2 trillion dollar long-term reduction in exchange for an increase in the debt ceiling. so, you know, the need to take it to another level. this is a more complex problem, and it's the beginning of a series of negotiations between the two. they are going to be together for the next four years. the president won the elec
it in building a good, solid farm bill which actually found $23 billion in savings towards the deficit. we did it in passing a strong highway bill that will strengthen our nation's infrastructure. and we did it most recently this week in working through a large and complex defense authorization bill that will keep our nation safer and more secure in these perilous times. it will take more of this kind of cooperation and consensus building to address the very real and substantial challenges facing our nation today. that is why i'm deeply concerned about a proposal floated recently by some members of the majority regarding the rules of the senate. they propose to change the nearly 100-year-old senate rule that requires a two-thirds majority to change the operating rules of the senate. our colleagues in the majority are proposing to use a simple majority vote to make the change. that's the issue here. the issue is the manner in which they plan to do it. once the precedent of changing a rule with a simple majority vote is established, 51 senators could change the rules to suit their own convenienc
that there are no miracle cures. does the hard work and dealing with deficit and ensuring that britain wins the global race. that work is underway. the deficit is down. borrowing is down. jobs are being created. it is a hard road, but we are making progress. everything that we do, we are helping those who want to work hard and get along. thank you. [cheers] [cheers] >> mr. speaker, today after 2.5 years, we can see and people can feel in the country the scale of this government economic failure. [cheers] our economy this year is contracting. the conferred government borrowing is revised this year and every year. the national deficit is not rising. excuse me, it is rising, it is not falling. [cheers] i will say again that our economy is contracting this year. government rowling is revised up and the national debt is rising. it is not falling. there are people struggling to make ends meet. middle and lower income families who are paying the price. where millionaires get a tax cut and a 3 billion-pound welfare handout to the people who need it. let me spell out the facts. you might learn something. [cheers] [
balanced, responsible ways to reduce our deficit next week. we can reform our tax code next year. but we must give economic certainty to the middle class now, today. democrats agree, independents agree, and the majority of republicans agree, mr. president, and the american public agrees by a huge margin. even dozens of c.e.o.'s from major corporations whose personal taxes go up under our plan emphatically agree. the only people who aren't on board are republicans in congress. but now even they're crying out for compromise. i only hope my friend, john boehner, is listening. the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. mcconnell: mr. president? the presiding officer: the republican leader is recognized. mr. mcconnell: i ask consent that further proceedings under the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. mcconnell: yesterday afternoon came to the floor and offered president obama's proposal on the fiscal cliff to show t
low for middle-class families against the urgency of addressing our national budget deficits. by keeping tax rates low for 98% of americans and letting the tax rates go up very modestly for families earning over $250,000 a year, the democratic plan would cut the deficit by as much as a trillion dollars over the next decade. now, that alone doesn't cure our budget imbalance, but along with fair and sensible tax reforms and smart cuts in spending, it is part of the solution. let's be clear about one thing. the middle-class tax cut act would still benefit high-end taxpayers. families making over $250,000 a year would pay lower tax rates on their first $250,000. so if a family made $255,000, they'd only see an increase on the top $5,000 and then only to the clinton era rates that were in effect during the 1990's when, as we all recall, our economy was thriving. under the senate-passed plan, a family earning $255,000 a year would pay an extra 150 bucks in taxes. in opposing the middle-class tax cuts act, republicans claim that it would hurt the economy to raise tax rates on the to
control. i show ultimately he controlled inflation by refusing to monetize the budget deficit. the problem began october 79 to drive down inflation from 12% down of 4% by 1982 it was down at 4% but the final victory for interest-rate after congress passed a balanced budget amendment called the gramm-rudman go the proposed draconian cuts in government spending less congress passed a balanced budget. sound familiar? one of the sponsors of the bill said it was a bad idea. yet only after gramm-rudman was passed then it climbed below the 10% level they had remained above the paul volcker first six years at the head of the central bank. what chartered the unprecedented legislation? just before past the late senator john heinz uncovered hidden agenda in the paul volcker plan. this so important i am going to reenact the conversation. ready? >> mr. chairman we have agreed the deficit is bad. but in my experience with congress is anything to go by, there will have to be a crisis to fix it. my question is, a you prepared to bring about the necessary crisis the year continued restrictive monetary poli
deficit and debt. so this, this legislation both accomplishes that goal and still provides an increase in diversity which is what the senator from new york was talking about. and then an additional point is the point that the senator from texas so very clearly made. this legislation passed the house. last time i checked, legislation has to pass the senate and the house. that's a pretty important distinction. going back to the comments of the senator from kentucky. he said hey, if we can't do it all at once because of disagreements, let's start getting done what we can get done. so here is a bill that provides us with -- with people who can help our economy grow, people in the sciences and technology fields that we very much need. it will increase diversity just as the senator from new york said, and it's passed the house. common sense says let's go. let's pass the bill. so we very much want to join with the senator from new york and the senator from delaware and the other sponsors that he referred to, but let's join on something that can actually get done, meaning a bill that passes th
the deficit and restructure fiscal policy. so as eventually to bring the budget into balance. this framework must include tax reforms to raise more revenue, encourage growth and enhance progressivity. it must include parameters defining future levels of debt as a share of the gdp. and a date by which the budget will balance. and it must include changes to discretionary spending, entitlements as well as defense. our elected leaders should launch an expedited process to enact legislation that will construct this framework many 2013 -- in 2013, including powerful but appropriate default and enforcement mechanisms. without a recalibrated, sustainable fiscal policy, the united states' international standing will decline, and its national security will be undermined. such an outcome would be bad for the united states and, in our view, bad for the world. as pete said, he and i are joined here today with three, by three distinguished individuals. er is slams of america for -- servants of america for decades who made a difference, who had to come up with tough solutions to very complex problems. and
-term deficit reduction, health care, the future of the republican party and more. .. >> guest: that he could not raise the adequate amount of wheat that he wanted to. because the government had decided they were going to control wheat plantings. and so what he said was, okay, then i can raise wheat for my chickens. and he took it all the way to the supreme court and lost that battle. >> host: why do you recount that story in "the debt bomb"? >> guest: because it's a great example on the enumerated powers and the unwinding -- why do we find ourself in the place we're in now? how'd we get here, what do by -- we do about it, and what are the ramifications? the greatest way for the government to make something expensive is for the government to make it affordable. and all you have to do is look at the programs. what were the average inflationary costs of health care before we created medicare and medicaid? they ran the same as every other aspect of our inflation. in other words, there was no differential between health care costs. now that we have a government program, what has happened is healt
years to reduce the deficit and restructure the fiscal policy. so is eventually to bring the budget into balance. this framework must include tax reforms to raise more revenues and encourage growth and enhance productivity. it must include parameters defined in future levels of debt as a share of the gdp. it must include changes to discretionary spending and entitlements as well as defense. our elected leaders should launch legislation that will construct this framework and 2013. including powerful but appropriate default of enforcement mechanisms. without a recalibrated unsustainable fiscal policy, the united states international standing will decline in the national security will be undermined. such an outcome would be bad for the united states, and it could be bad for the world. as pete said, he and i are joined here today by three distinguished individuals. those serving america for decades made who made a difference in how to come up with solutions to very complex problems. it has been a privilege for me to be with them in approaching what this coalition and those who are not h
that reduced the deficit to avoid the fiscal cliff. we should not put off hard decisions of gimmicks or with triggers. that's what got us here in the first place. it's time to bite the bullet and make the tough decisions and make them now. the first thing we should do is immediately and permanently extend a middle-class tax cut. this will provide needed certainty to america's families and businesses and markets. this decisive action will ensure that millions of american families don't see attacks like of more than $2000 starting next month. in year-end agreement must also have a long-term extension of the debt ceiling. america cannot afford another debilitating to school showdown. it has to be a package deal. then we need to enact a long-term and comprehensive deficit solution. most serious plans recommend about $4 trillion deficit reduction over 10 years to restore fiscal balance. the budget control act banks about 1 billion. bringing our troops home from iraq and afghanistan saves another 800 billion. that's real savings. it should be counted. interest savings provide another 600 b
with respect to our deficit and debt is a national security liability. we need our senior leadership. we need a senior leadership to take it on. we have an opportunity to do so. we have a requirement to do so. at the foundation of national power is ultimately economic comment and in terms of global influence, in terms of the ability to support a military, the economic is foundation. and we have i think the united states, both an opportunity to require it to get our house in order, and i believe that our 100 senators and members of the house will step up on this and sufficient majority in the coming months. >> how do you look at your surplus of the u.s.? does that say we have america under our control? >> we are one of the closest allies of the united states. so of course our position today to united states is very, very decisive, strengthen our relationship. so these are not, there is no intention for us to try to use this kind of economic relationship in different context. so we are very satisfied with the current relationship with the united states. that's all spent let me open up to the fl
everything we've been hearing and reading, they do rank debt and the deficit very highly as a priority for elected officials to get done, to compromise and get to work. but they also made it very clear what they have made clear in every one of our previous 14 polls, and that is they want the debate to be connected to their real life and to things that they need to survive and thrive in this economy. the kitchen table discussion, if you will, is very important to them. so those priorities are very clear in their minds, and they are, they want good jobs, they want effective schools, they want affordable health care, they like social security, and today want to retire in -- they want to retire in dignity. they don't feel that, um, one has to embrace all of these priorities, but there is a framework here in this poll in the to-do list. there's a road map that the majority of americans believe would give their children a better chance at a better future. so people aren't necessarily hopeful that congress can deliver for them, but they are wishful. they very much want congress, a congress th
's no insignificant figure. again, when we're dealing with multitrillion dollar deficits, we do have a responsibility as a congress and a committee to see that the money is wisely spent, and even if it's stimulus money, that the money is spent. one of the questions i'll pose today to the secretary and to others that are before us, is to date only, i believe, 7% of the $10 billion has actually been expended to date. stop and think about that. we're supposed to be adding jobs. the stimulus was supposed to be creating economic opportunities. but 7% of the stimulus dollars s and the total $10 billion has been spent to date. i might also preface my remarks by saying i consider myself one of the strongest advocates -- in fact i have been quoted as saying the biggest cheerleader for transportation and for passenger rail and for high-speed rail in the country, and i still heap to cling to that title. my efforts as chair is actually to move the positive program forward. when we did the pre-act, the first rail passenger reauthorization in 11 years, and worked with the other side of the aisle in moving that imp
of protecting lives, but the delicate a structural deficit that the expenditure triggered that without that are basically enough firemen and police. president of on this prompt declaration was much appreciated because it took some of the doubt about whether spending money was going to rebound homering again. if we can look at the per capita threshold that triggers the high reimbursement, the fact is communities deserve that. they've experienced in historic repetition of bad weather that is really now starting to hit home and muscle in terms of the ability to provide basic functions for local government. thank you for holding this hearing and look forward to record the senate and house bipartisan groups to get the right response. >> representative, thank you. as a former member local government, there's so many times you go to the well. as a small tax base coming out of a recession with receipts are down. you make an important point this committee won't be dealing with supplemental directly. indirectly we will because so many of us, not myself on the west coast although born on the east
an agreement that avoids deficit cliff we're hanging on. >> thank you. from the va. >> [inaudible] >> so one of the big problems with these long number of disability claims is the medical records issue, and secretary discussed a long term fix, improve the medical records, and secretary panetta described, and something that helps people still in the service by having better physicals so that when they leave the service, there's a better record of what their actual problems are, but what do you do for people in the middle,s hundreds of thousands of people who have pending claims now postponed because of the fact that the medical records either don't exist or are too complicated to come by so you can't prove or disprove there's a date. is there hope for them in what the two of you are working on? >> yeah, i think our production demonstrates we are working cases where the records are not immediately available. we go through erroneous effort so there's a fully developed claim and request make judgments. we're doing that at a rate of a million claims a year, but the challenge for us is we get a mi
in this country comes together in france in agreement that avoids this deficit clips that were hanging on. >> from the va -- [inaudible] >> one of the big problems of disability claims that the medical records issue. [inaudible] to improve the medical records. secretary panetta, something that helps to have a better physicalism maybe this service will have a better record of what their problems are. what you do for the people to know, hundreds of thousands of people appending claims no and are being postponed because of the fact that medical records either to history too complicated to come by and prove whether they have a disability. >> i think production demonstrates we are working these cases aren't immediately available to develop them so we have a fully developed claim and can make judgments. we do that better reader than that a million claims a year big challenge for us is to get a million plus and returned coming in the door. that's where the automation system called veterans benefits management system is key to our ability to do with those numbers. we push a million claims that the door an
crisis. we have even published her own study on the deficit, copies of which are available here today. we look forward to continuing this conversation, keeping the dialogue ongoing over the next month and it's critical and we want to solve this problem and we think it will be very enlightening on what the issues are. with that i'm going to turn it over to you in the panel. thank you very much. >> can everybody hear? [inaudible] we do have an all-star panel. tim pawlenty the former governor of minnesota, i wrote that i thought he would have made the strongest presidential candidate. tim is now the head of the financial services roundtable, a job he took a month or two ago and he will be a huge player in washington. chris i have to say, first of all you kept two-thirds of your own district but your margins didn't go down at all. maybe a little bit. i know the county, one county represents for my son as and let's just say -- is a liberal but he did an incredible job. two senators now and on mars reminded when bob dole left the house to go to the senate, the single act -- [inaudible] bob cork
Search Results 0 to 24 of about 25